The Sun. — London, England, 1838-03-08 00:00:00

less sarcasm at me, but through my side you wound your own Ministry ; for if they have experienced the evils of delay as re gards Ireland, why did they fall into the very same error respecting Canada ?__( Cheers from the Opposition.) When there was a hope of accommodation at the period of the Act which deprived the Crown of its controul over the hereditary revenues, the proper measures were neglected which might have prevented the rebellion.—( Loud cheers.) In the first place, he would show the House (and that was of the utmost importance) the secresy with which the Commis sion was to be directed. Lord Glenelg gave those instruc tions. He enjoined the observance of secresy, as a premature disclosure of the steps they took might greatly embarrass Ministers, and even obstruct their own proceedings. Even in the very questions to be put to the witnesses this secrecy was to be observed.—( Hear, hear.) He should wish to ask the Hon. Gentleman chat was the particular look he put on to prevent persons from entertaining the slightest suspicion of what his political feelings were ?—( Hear, and laughter.) Sir C. GREY attempted to make an observation, but was called to order. the precedents and speculations which he ( Sir R. Peel) had never doubted of the tenacity of i life of a Ministry under severe inflic tion—(Laughter)—that tenacity of life he was willing to admit which he ( Sir R. Peel) under a sense of duty had on a former occasion exhibited.--(Cries of " Oh, oh 1" from the Minis terial benches.) He was afraid, however, that the Right Hon. Gentleman with all his precedents for the tenacity of life of an Administration wider severe beatings hardly could survive the infliction of the present stripe.--( Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman said, how could they presume to bring the present amendment forward ; in answer to which he would tell him that the honour of the Conservative party was at stake if they did not do so--( Cheers )—in order to vindicate their before expressed opinions upon the subject.— ( Cheers.) What would the Right Hon. Gentleman have had him (Sir H. Peel) do ? Would he have had him ab sent himself from the House altogether ? That was one course that he might have pursued; he might have been compelled to avoid giving a vote, because the question might have been so put, as that he could not safely give his affirmative or negative, but he would never shrink from ap pearing in that House in order to avoid such a matter.— (Cheers.) Would the Right Hon. Gentleman have them move the previous question?—(Cheers.) Alas I they had so damaged the previous question—(Cheers)—that for some ti:oe to come the previous question would hardly shew its face.—( Loud continued cheering.) After the use that had been made by those on the other side of the House of the previous question, in the course of last week, he had no great encouragement to pursue that course.—( Cheers.) What would the Members on his side of the House say to him had he moved the previous question for the purpose of shielding them ?—(Cheers.) That course would be difficult to pursue. He could not vote for the motion of the Hon. Gentleman in the first place, because he thought it was unjust.—(Cheers.) If a Minister had committed in his department some act of gross neglect or malversation, or some act for which he was singly and personally respsnsible, it would be perfectly right that the House should signify its opinion that that Minister ought to be removed. In the present in stance, the charge against Lord Glenelg was, with respect to the whole course of Canadian and Colonial policy. According to the lion. Gentleman's motion, his object would be achieved by Lord Glenelg being removed from the Colonial Office, and for anything lie knew himself being substituted. He could not say that that would answer his object ; he could not be content to cast imputations upon Lord Glenelg and relieve the rest of the Government from responsibility on account of their Colonial policy; but the Hon. Baronet said that his in tention was to visit indirectly the whole Government with pu nishment ; if that was his object, why shouldla single individual be selected for the purpose of punishing a whole Government ? Considering the whole progress of Canadian policy, not to be the act of one Minister but of the whole Government, they preferred applying their disapprobation to the whole of the policy. The Noble Lord and the Hon. Gentleman opposite (said the Right Hon. Baronet) might have relieved us from that difficulty by taking the course which I naturally expected they would.—( Cheers.) I thought that after the panegyric of the Noble Lord on Lord Glenelg, and indignant of the charge made against them, they were determined to meet that charge by a counter-resolution, implying the approbation of the House.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Bart. the Member for Leeds gave them so fair an opportunity of moving that counter-resolution that I cannot under stand how the flesh and blood of attached friends could resist it ; and even now, when I suggest it to them, I am very doubtful whether they will not adopt my suggestion, as they did my amendment to the Canada Bill—(Great laughter, and uproarious cheering on the Con servative benches)—and relieve us from the necessity in which we are placed of moving this resolution.—(Hear, hear.) If I venture to promise, on the part of my Noble Friend (Lord Sandon) that, if the Noble Lord will adopt my reasonable suggestion of a count:r-resolution, flattering to his Noble Friend—that in that case we will waive our resolu tion, and we will fight the battle in opposition to the reso lution of the Hon. Baronet.—(Tremendous cheering.) See what the Honourable Gentleman does. He proposes that an humble Address be presented to her Majesty respectfully expressing the opinion of this House, that the Colonial Minister should be a man of judgment, forethought, diligence, activity, and firmness. Now the Government are going to negative that.—( Great laughter.) lam not surprised at it.---( Renewed laughter.) These successions of qualities are sometimes the most unfortunate things ; but still it is rather hard to be called upon to give a direct negative to the propo sition that the Colonial Minister ought to be a man of judg ment and activity.—(Laughter.) Then the Hon. Baronet goes on to declare, by his motion, that Lord Glenelg does not enjoy the confidence of this House and the country. Now I say the natural amendment to the Hon. Baronet's motion, and which I think having suggested it the Noble Lord will adopt, was to leave out those latter words, and distinctly to vote that the Colonial Minister ought to be a man in whose judgment, diligence, forethought, activity, and firmness this House and the public could place reliance ; and seeing the Noble Lord at the head of the Colonial Department did unite in himself those qualities of activity, judg ment, forethought, diligence, and firmness, this House is of opinion that the administration of Colonial affairs should continue to be committed to the Noble Lord, They (the Tories) would then withdraw their proposition, and meet the resolution of the Noble Lord.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord had recent precedent for such a course. When Mr. Canning's Spanish policy was attacked, he did not content himself with rejecting the resolution of condemnation, with moving the previous question—but he moved a counter-reso lution, calling on the House to mark its approbation of the conduct of Ministers.—( Hear, hear.) But the Noble Lord, after assuming the attitude of bold defiance, and exclaiming " I will not move a previous etuest . on," concluded by saying. " I must say No' to this motion."--(Laughter.) Why not have tried the faintest approbation of this unhappy victim, selected by the Hon. Baronet, Sir W. Moleswoith ? —( Cheers.) " Sir (concluded the Right Hon. Ba ronet), I know not what will be the result of this motion, but this I know, that the course which has been pursued on this debate—the appeals to the party spirit of Members, instead of appeals to the justice of the cause—that this reliance on the political partiali ties of your friends, instead of showing the charges untrue, convinces me that it was equally impossible adhering to the form in which this resolution must be met, to meet it in any other way'than by a distinct declaration of our opinion; and that it is to the honour of the party with which I am connected, whatever may be the consequences of their amendment, so to frame it that it may not expressly seek the support of those who differ from it with regard to principles of general policy ; and of this I am assured that we should have been charged by you with weakness and timidity had we taken an evasive course—if, compelled to approach the discussion of Canadian and Colonial policy we had shrunk frcm the duty of faithfully adhering to the opinions which we have entertained, and that we should hare been visited with the condemnation of those whom we consider mainly the authors of the revolt, and whom we believe have undermined the prerogative and power of her Majesty. The Right Hon. Baronet resumed his seat amidst tremendous and long-coutinued cheering. Sir CHARLES GREY rose to explain, but was consi dered by the Speaker out of order. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—As we have now proposed from the other side of th-. House the question of a direct vote of censure upon the conduct of the Administration, I cannot forbear more especially after the declaration of the Right Hon. Gen tleman at the close of his speech, to notice in what a singular manner, and at what an extraordinary time, this motion has , been brought forward.—( Hear, hear.) We discussed the affairs of Canada a few days ago—we went through a Bill containing provisions of very great importance with respect to the Government of Canada, and we passed enactments by which a supreme power was conferred upon the persons who should administer those Provinces. In the course of those debates there was a question as to the instructions to be given to the Governor, and upon that point especially I called upon the Gentlemen opposite, if they wished to condemn the Go vernment then to make the motion of condemnation. Upon that occasion the Right Hon. Baronet expressly said--" I move no condemnation." Sir R. PEEL —No condemnation on the instructions. Sir R. PEEL was giving Hon. Gentle:nen an instance of vigilance on the part of a Colonial Secretary, without a pa rallel on the political records of the country.—( Hear.) He stated in his instructions, that he would not too earnestly enjoin the observance of secresy, nor too strongly point out the neces sity of this, in the very tone and manner of addressing wit nesses.—( Hear, hear.) This was of the utmost importance to prevent jealousies, and keep alive the good feeling of the parties concerned.---( Cheers. ) Well, this Commission went out and Lord Gosford having got his instructions, made a speech to the Assembly, and he ( Sir R. Peel) charged that speech with being calculated to raise false hopes.--( Hear, hear, hear.) Any instructions given by a Minister, so equivocal and so calculated to elude, he had never read.—( Hear, hear. ) The menifest intention of the Colonial Secretary was that the Legislative Council should not be elected. If he wanted an instance of irresolution—an instance of an act having a tendency to deceive—he had only to read the instructions given by Lord Glenelg. He said the Constitution must he supported; the King's Government always had certainly an intention of applying reforms, but it was neces sary to support the Government and the Constitu tion —and whether the Government had any interest in the Legislative Government or not, it was demonstratively clear the wish was that the Legislative Council should not be elected. Lord Gosford made a speech to the Assembly. He left it in doubt whether the Legislative Assembly should be. elective or not, and what was the result? Why, that the Canadian As sembly presented an address. After the first speech of Lord Gosford them appeared to be every prospect of an accommodation. Mr. Gipps saw the course pursued was so far successful that there was a very reasonable prospect up to the 9th of that month that the arrears for the last three years would be granted. The result of the first speech which Lord Gosford delivered was the expression of the readiness on the part of the Assembly to grant three years arrears. Mr. Gipps said, without desiring to exaggerate the evil consequences of the disclosure of the instructions at so critical a juncture, he was justified in saying that if the supplies had been obtained there was a fair chance in the next Session of having a majority in the Assembly. Now, what took place? The instructions which Lord Gosford had withheld were published by Sir Francis Head ; and what was the consequence ? On the 7th of March, 1836, there was a complete assurance of the determination to grant the supplies. This was provisional— adopted at a meeting of persons of the most influence in the House of Assembly. The question being to come on on the 11th March, the instructions reached Quebec on the 9th, and the course of proceeding was entirely changed—the Sup plies were voted for only six months, and a new Address was carried by the same majorities as in the years 1834 and 1835. On that occasion the minority was reduced to the old number of eight, although on the question of Supplies it had been carried by 35 against 47. Was not that a defeat of all reasonable hopes of accommodation by the misconduct of the Colonial officers ? What said Lord Glenelg? He gave the same account. Whose fault was it that the instructions were published? Lord Glenelg communicated them to Sir F. Head. Lord Glenelg knew it was the custom in Canada to publish instructions, but he never accompanied his transmis mission of these instructions with a hint that Sir. F. Head was to be careful : how he published them, but on the contrary, he expressly said, " Lay the contents of that dis patch before the Colonial Assembly of Upper Canada." The dispatch was published and what was the consequence? What was the consequence ?_Why, the defeat of all the hopes they entertained. Was that not a case in which it was clearly proved that from a want of foresight and decision great evils had arisen. They knew the character of that body—they knew that there was in the colony a party of disaffected indi viduals who would be glad to seize on any pretext of this sort to spread discontent around them.—( Hear, hear. ) Was it not a duty incumbent on Government to take care not to allow themselves to be placed in the wrong, or to give these men an opportunity of making a pretended appeal for justice ? They had done precisely the same thing with respect to the executive government. They had deluded them with false hopes. When the Government proposed the resolutions of last year, one of the important conditions attached to the depriving the House of Assembly of the controul of the public money was, that they would make improvements in the Legislative Council. The grace and favour wh:ch they were disposed to grant, in lieu of the constitutional privileges of which they proposed to de prive the Canadians, wore exactly what Lord Aberdeen had promised two years before. Could any man doubt that a prudent and wise Government having to deal with a disaffected people, ready to take advantage of any laches on their part, would have deprived them of the opportunity of saying that th ey h a d put the i r han d s i n the purse of the- Colony without giving them what had been promised them in lieu of their constitutional privilege ? In 1836, what said their own Governor with respect to the Executive Go vernment ? He wished to convict them on the testimony of their °lvn officer. Sir G. Gipps, writinglon the 14th of March, 1636, said—" neither on the subject of the Executive Council does the Report express a sufficiently decisive opinion, considering that we are now six months in the province. As the Governor declared that the Legislative Council was vicious, I think that, about this time, we ought to have arrived at some settled opinion on that p( Hear, hear, hear.) The year 1837 approached, and they (the Government) took the money out of the public chest on a promise that the Coun cil should be improved.—( Hear.) Lord Glenelg then wrote out that the time for procrastination was gone by.---( Hear.) But when the time came, the resolutions for taking the money Wer e sent out to Canada, but nothing was said about the im provement.—( Cheers.) True, the Ministers said that there Were more difficulties in the way than they had foreseen. But At that time they knew the state of the colony, and they knew from what class of per sons th e C ounc ill ors wet e t o b e se lected. They were as cognizant at the time when they made the promise as they were when they passed the resolutions.— ( Vehement Tory cheers.) Why did they not take the course then which they took afterwards ?—( Loud cheers.) Why did they not say to Lord G o sford, that upon him it must ultimately fall to make the selection of the Town C ouncillors, and to tell him to make the utmost enquiries in the mean time, to enable him to make the selection of the best Persons. In that, again, they gave the Assembly an advan tage.—(Tory cheers.) H e was o bli ge d to go th ro ugh this d e monstration of the errors of her Majesty's Ministers, because if he stated only general charges, the Noble Lord opposite (J. Russell) would be ready to reply that he had not stated far ther instances, in which hopes had been raised which had not been realised. But he had now shown that in consequence of their own acts, the institutions of this country and of the Co l evy, had been materially prejudiced.—(Tory cheers.) Ile would not go into the question of military force—( Ministerial cheering) —he would not go into that question now ; but the Papers which he held in his hand were conclusive proofs that three years ago the Government was aware that the two par ties were inflamed with inextinguishable rancour and hatred towards each other. They were aware of the coming storm, and they should have presided a sufficient force in Canada to prevent the necessity of employing one party against an other. They ought not to have created the necessity of drawing up those two parties of their fellow subjects in hostility and in arms. On these grounds he felt justified in supporting the amendment, as embodying the opinions which he held respecting the conduct of her Majesty's Ministers in regard to Canada. He was entitled to bring it forward, be cause one Hon. Gentleman had given notice that be would call the attention of the House to their Colonial policy, and he wished to know why - . he was brought to account for this ? How was he to proceed ? He made no apology.—( Cheers. ) It was a perfectly novel policy, that because a Ministry was to be displaced, the conduct of the Government was never to be questioned.—( Cheers.) Why, what was the whole of the defence? It was not a defence of the Colonial policy of the Government—( Hear, hear.) Not a word could be said i n defence of the charge of vacillation and indecision. Not one wor d ; an d every Gentleman who had ad dressed the House, except those who were connected with the Government, had abandoned them.—( Hear. ) The first Honou ra ble Member who had risen after the 'ton. Baron e t h a d b ro ught forward his motion , the lion. Membe r for Marylebone, had stated,, I think exceedingly for he ( Sir Robert t eel) had taken down his words, rlof the coloni a l p o licy of the present Gov er n ment ;". b en , using a me t ap h or w hich was afterwards borrowed by another Honourable Member, lie added, " I don't con eider th e i r C o l on i al pol i cy is the b r i g h tes t ge m in the Minis terial Crown, but I am deterred from voting for tlis amend tficent, because th e cer t a i n coesequence will be the displacing (3 ' the Government." 'lt was so with every other Gentleman — they had all virtually abandoned the Government on the sub ject of Canada—they had admitted that the resolution was " 1 1 founded; but they and the Government united in °he general compact, because the consequence of its success would be that they would be displaced.—(Cheers.) Was that consideration always to deter men from expressing their opinions? The Right" Hon. Gentleman opposite had been searching for precedents of consolation for a beaten Govern- Ille nt.—(Vehement cheering and laughter from the Opposi licm benches.) The eight lion. Gentleman had led them 44 t 0 amusing speculations as to the degree of beating 14 Government could sustain consistently with the maintenance of its existence—(Great laughter)—and he had been lockin g back, suffering under the stripes he Lad receivrd l ast week, in which, out of five divisions, he had been left in a tnitiority in he believed four of them.—( Hear, hear.) The R ight Hon. Gentleman having been qualified for the office had applied himself to that consolation, not mourning over the 'asses he h a d me t w ith ; but he had said that beaten as he was, he Would aply himself fur consolation to the records of past beatings__( Great laughter)—and he had said " I do find that o n several occas i ons , o n the Salt Tax, and other measures, the Ty Governments have suffered severe beatings."—( Hear, ; al . • He, Sir R. Peel, could hive afforded an instance 41 himself, of a man remaining in office after suffering various that th at lastbeatings ; but the Right Hon. Gentleman must admit stripe thus inflicted upon him, notvtithstending all Lord J. RUSSELL—The Right Honourable Gentleman says and says most truly, that he meant that he moved no condemnation on the instructions. I fully admit that; but if the Right Hon. Gentleman, the mover of a great party in this House, meant to say—l do not interfere with your Go vernment of Canada, I leave you to carry on that Govern ment by a person who must be invested with almost des i.otic powers, and yet have an intention —if intention Ito had of remaining behind to impugn the manner in hich that Government should be conducted, it would be utterly impossible for those entrusted with the Administra tion of that country to carry on any :part of that policy. If the Right Hon. Baronet acted in that manner, having the intention of pao.ing this vote of censure, h e w ou ld h av e been guilty of the greatest duplicity. But the fact is, he bad no such intention.—( Cheers.) The intention of the Right Hon. Gentleman evidently was, that this power, vast and unusual as it was, should be conferred on the present Secretary of State for the Colonies, and that these powers should be exercised under the responsibility of her Majesty's advisers. With respect to the Hon. Baronet the Member for Leeds, who had brought for ward the motion as to the Secretary for the Colonies, I must say that if he had been the representative of a considerable party in the House—if he had come forward as the representative of that party, as his Noble Friend ironically described him to be, pretending to carry on themselves the Government of this country—it would have been necessary to have proposed some declarati?,n on the subject. But what was the case? He brought forward a motion on grounds especial to himself. Going over all parts of this habitable and even the unin habitable globe, and ending with a general condemna tion of the policy pursued by various administrations, my Noble Friend, the Member for Liverpool left all these sub jects untouched ; he took no notice of the miserable condition of the Aborigines of New Zealand ; he took no notice of the disputes which unhappily prevailed between the Caffres and Hott entots, w ho entirely neglected the state of the Mauritius ; he took no notice of the questions relating to the West Indies—but he at once fixed upon Ca nada, and said it is true that this motion has no reference t. Cane liar Effairs, but the opportunity is too good to be lost; now is the time to move it, and let a vote of cen sure be carried on the subject of Canadian affairs. I can not but entertain the feeling which must be entertained by others that the proper time, if the motion had been intended was not on the first day, when the address was proposed, but that the measure should not have been finally allowed to pass without some notice having been given that Honourable Gentlemen opposite meant to bring forward this motion— ( Loud cheers)—and that they did not do so I firmly Right Hon. person s a y s i s n ot a com pa attribute alliance,bute to rs. what the is s perhaps a compact union—it is a union of Gentlemen, many of them differing in prudence and temper THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 1838. f ern the Right Honourable Gentleman, but who do seem at this time to have a mastery over his conscience.—( Cheers.) I have observed the party opposite during some years in different circumstances in their prosperity and their adversity, and I certainly have observed in their later days that the observation which was made in olden time, " that parties were like serpents, and were moved by their tails"—( Laughter and cheers) the conduct of the Right Hon. Gentleman on the Canada Bill I believe to have been influenced in this way. He pro posed amendments on the Bill—( Hear, hear.) He said that he was constrained to move those amendments, even though the consequence should be the resignation of Ministers. I must say that after the Bill has been passed, the course pursued by the Right Honourable Gentleman, merely because the Honourable Baronet the Member for Leeds has brought forward this motion, is as unlike any former conduct of the Right Honourable Gentleman as can possibly be conceived. With respect to the charges made against the Government in relation to the affairs of Canada, I dae think there never was a time when a motion of censure by the House of Commons, to remove a Ministry, was made upon grounds so slight. I will refer, in the first place, to a former precedent, to show how, and under what circum stances, a great man, allied with a great party, acted. On the Bth of March, 1732, at the end of the American war, Lord John Cavendish brought forward a series of resolutions, which, after stating the vast sums expended in the war, con ' eludes in the words very similar to those in the amendment of the Noble Lord, that all the evils which had been there set out were attributable to want of foresight and ability on the part of the Government. If a person wanted to parody these resolutions, is is only necessary to state, that half the expendi ture was in an unsuccessful resistance to a successful revolt. Whether the conduct which we have pursued has been the best, the result has been different from that of the American war, to which it has been improperly likened.—( Ministerial cheering.) How, then, can Gentlemen opposite come for ward to support a vote of censure upon this occasion ? What is the question? Has the rebellion been successful? No.— ( Cheers.) Has the resistance to it been unsuccessful ? No. —( Renewed cheers.) But that is their case—( Laughter) —and it is one which they cannot make out by any one docu ment which they have quoted. It might be, perhaps, that by a different course of conduct the revolt would have been prevented.—( Tory cheers.) That might be, but I do not think it was so; yet we cannot be expected to prove the negative—( Hear, hear)—and equally impos sible is it to prove that there might not have been some conduct but for which there might not have been a revolt.—(Laughter, and Hear, hear.) But looking to the whole course of the policy of my Noble Friend, and looking to the position in which he was placed by the conduct of the former Government, I think that he cannot be charged with any want of foresight, or of any incapacity in the leading principles by which his conduct was governed.—( Cheers.) Looking to the Constitution of 1791, my own opinion of that Constitution is, that it did create two antagonist bodies, which were sure to come into a collision sooner or later.—(Hear, hear.) And it framed machinery which it was impos sible to work for any length of time.--( Hear, hear.) You gave to one party the House of Assembly, and for the other you reserved places in the Legislative Council. The result was, that differences and collisions occurred between the two Assemblies, and in truth the wonder is not that colli sions took place, but that harmony had been so long pre served. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir R. Peel) speaks as if some upon this side of the house, who were connected with Lord Grey's Government, were responsible for the conduct of Governments which preceded them pre vious to 1830. That is not the question—the charge is not made upon any such ground. Previous to the year 1830 there were grounds enough for votes of censure. We have the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons of 1828, in which it is stated, that in the progress of the dispute between the two Chambers—the House of Assembly and the Legislative Council—the local Government had found it ne cessary to have recourse to a measure which nothing but ex treme necessity could justify, in appropriating annually one hundred and thirty thousand pounds, without the consent of the Representatives of the people. The Committee re gretted that such a necessity had existed without any commu nication having been made to Parliament upon the subject. Now, I say, that that would have justified a resolution of cen sure, if it had been the object of the Opposition of that day to bring before the House a question of Colonial misconduct. —( Cheers.) I say, Sir, that the Right Hon. Gentleman, being then Colonial Secretary, we should have been far more justified than you now are, in demanding how you were to defend yourselves from the charge of takieg their money without the sanction of Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) But did that misgovernment cease in 1828? In that year the Com mittee had come to a resolution for whic'i the people of Ca nada felt very grateful ; but did the Government then formed by the Duke of Wellington act upon that resolution ? Did the Colonial Secretary bring in any Bill upon the subject ? ( Hear, hear.) I believe lam right in stating, that the whole of 1829, passed without the introduction of any Bill to carry into effect that Report which was rightly said by my Right Hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, would be the best chance for effecting a reconciliation. So much for dilatory conduct. The special charges imputed to my Noble Friend, Lord Glenda, is delay ; and I should like to know how they can be acquitted of delay when they allowed the whole of that year to pass without introducing any Bill. What happened in the next year ? In the next year, or, I believe, in the c, urge of that very year 1829, there came strong representat . ens from Sir J. Kempt, that the matter ought to be settled. In 1530 my Hon. Friend brought forward reso lutions to the House on the subject, declaring, among other things, that Judges should not be members of the Executive Council—that Executive Council of which we are now accused of not having promoted the reform.—( Hear, hear.) That motion was seconded by my Noble Friend the Member for Liverpool—( Cheers)—and he used very strong terms with regard to the want of good government in that colony. lie stated that he was afraid in the course of ten years of a former Administration they had contrived to reise up a little faction of interested persons, who had too frequently opposed themselves to the wishes of the Govern ment. The terms used by my Noble Friend were very strong with regard to the Government of the colony, and he seconded the motion on that occasion. Who opposed that motion ? Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for l'rnworth,—( Loud cheers)—the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire, the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Pembroke, and certainly the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool, all voted in the minority to carry that resolution; and now we hare the Noble Lord, having failed in that object, coming forward, and knowing as he does, that that delay, and that neglect had produced the misconduct, he then turns round and joins the Right Hon. Gentleman—(Loud and protracted cheering)— in order to lay blame upon us, which would be much more fairly attributable to neglect of the Committee of 1828. But the Right Hon. Gentleman says that there came a time when a great and decided measure was taken by the Administration of which he was a Member, if not the head—(Cheers)- -that there was a time, at the end of 1834, when at length a decisive remedy was to be given, all evils redressed, all grievances put an end to, and the colonies placed in a per fect state of harmony and tranquillity. What assurance have we that such would be the case ?—None, but that there was a dispatch sent to the Colonial-office.—( Cheers.) That it would produce harmony was a matter of speculation, with which he differed from the Right Hoe. Gentleman. What eas his account of this dispatch ? Why, that to remedy the com plaints of the Canadians with respect to the revenue, they put an absolute negative on the Elective Council. Lord Gosford proposed in 1835 that the whole revenue should be given up to the House of Assembly in the same manlier as Lord Aberdeen proposed. That did not satisfy them because they were not satisfied that there was any intention to make the Legislative Council elective. What was an sweri the of the House of Assembly at that time ? Why, it is true you have made the proposal to us of placing the revenues at our disposal ; but if you refuse us an elective Legislative Council, we will refuse you the supplies.—( Cheers ) What has been their conduct since ? Why, they have refused the supplies, because they thought the present Government would be opposed to ae elective Council, and therefore that it would not he granted. When this was pressed upon Lord Aberdeen, he did not meet it with a direct negative ; but supposing that he had, what I ask would have been the effect? Why, they would have still demanded an Elective Council, and the stop page which took place in 1837, would have taken place then. Then, Sir, I say the Right Hon. Gentleman cannot suppose that the instructions given by Lord Aberdeen would produce any thing like harmony. But if it were necessary to accompany, as he says, a refusal of the Elective Council by a large armed force—if the refusal of the Elective Council in 1837 should have been accompanied by a large armed force, as the Right Hon. Gentleman says tha t the colony has been for three years in a state of clamour-7.1. such were the case, how is it that the Right Hon. Baron et dld not send out a sufficient force when he was in office?—( C heers : ) But the question that would have come before the Asse mbl y would have been nhether they would have granted th e sup plies ? My argument is, and my belief is, that things hid then arrived at that crisis, that without an Elective Legislativ e Conn ; cil they would not have granted money ; and if they would no. have granted money it was impossible for any G ove rnment 0 I this country to do other than one of two resolutions, either to carry on the Government by the Imperial Parliament without grantitig the Elective Legislative Council, or to grant the elective Legislative Council, and any other demands they might make. The Right Honourable Gentleman took the first of these alternatives. The Right Honourable Gentle man has complained much of certain parts of the instruc tions to the Commissioners with respect to the Executive, and my Noble Friend the Member for North Lancashire has complained of the ins. ructions with respect to the Legislative Council. Sir, my opinion now is, after the experience I bare had, that unless you had placed in the Legislative Council, and also in the Execu tive Council, persons devoted to that party of which Papineau was the leader, that you would not have given con ciliation to the Assembly of Lower Canada. That has been the difficulty. Lord Gosford latterly, by the instructions of LorLord Glenelg, placed certain persons in the Legislative Council of Canadian extraction, and generally of liberal feeling, but not being of that party, the meetings in Canada declared that concession was totally insufficient. They declared that it was rather an insult to the people of Canada.—( Hear, hoar. ) Wily, then, if matters in Canada had arrived to that state that the people, led by Monsieur Papineau and others, would not have been satisfied unless you placed their followers in the Legislative and Executive Councils, and that, on the other hand, the British party would have found it intolerable if that power had been given to that party, whatever might have been the steps to it, you must have come to the collision that has arisen. But we did think, and we have been blamed for t hat, that although the Canadian Assembly would not have granted our demands, that although there would have been touch discontent in the Province, we did think that the Cana dians would not have resorted to force of arms, or to raise the standard of revolt. Persons judging candidly on that proposi- tion must refer I think to those who were in Canada, who were in Nova Scotia, and who being persons of naval and military rank, may be supposed to be persons competent to form a judgment on, those questions. It is upon the opinion of these persons the Duke of Wellington formed his judgment. I know attempts have been made to quibble away the meaning of the Noble Duke's expressions. But their plain meaning is not to be so quibbled away, and they remain as an acquittal of the Government for not sending more troops to Canada.—( Cheers.) Another authority, entitled on this subject to great credit, is that of Mr. Roebuck, who, in one of his speeches, said that the Canadians had not force enough to resist the country by arms. Sir, the main defence after all is, that in cases of very great difficulty the revolt was not general, but partial, and had been suppressed by force of her Majesty's troops. There still exists difficulties in the province which were not conquered by the Administration of Mr. Pitt in 1791 ; nor of Lord Liverpool in 1825 ; nor of the Duke of Wellington in 1828 ; and which would not have been conquered by the Administration of the Right Honourable Baronet in 1831.—( Loud cheers.) I say, Sir, upon vague presumptions, that things might have been better—that some passages in certain despatches were not altogether reconcilable with the opinions of some Hon. Gentlemen as to what ought to have been said. But those par ticular circumstances were slight and trifling grounds for a censure upon the Government.—( Hear.) And, fur my own part I feel more comfortable in the reflection that my Noble Friend ( Lord Glenelg) is at the head of the Colonial depart ment, than I was when my Noble Friend (Lord Stanley) was at the head of it.—( Hear, hear, hear, and cheers.) I must say when my Noble Friend was at the head of the Colonial Department, I remember the expres sions that were used by him to a popular Assem bly. I own that when those terms were used in the statute—l remember, likewise, that my feeling was having had the misfortune to differ with the Noble Lord upon many ques tions of Irish policy—thinking, as it is now notorious to the world, that his measures upon that subject had tended to inflame and exasperate.—( Cries of Hear, bear, hear.) I always had a sort of hope, not without some misgivings, that my Honourable Friend who had produced so little good in Ireland, might do something better in the Colonies, and that I should not have the misery of suffering in those responsibilities arising from the miseries of his policy in Ireland again in the Colonies—( Vehement cheers from both sides of the House.) I say my difference with the Noble Lord in respect to the affairs of Ireland after wards became notorious to the world—and there is no reason from any conduct that he has pursued towards me, any more than towards any of his other former colleagues, which should induce me now to withhold my opinion with respect to his policy in governing the affairs of a great empire. I had hoped those differences were confined to the subject of the Irish Church. I had hoped, that having arisen from an opinion early conceived by the Noble Lord with respect to the Church, they were not differences that affected general principles of Admi nistration ; but I own from what I have seen since that I think, though it might be easy to make a taunt against the Noble Lord for leaving the party to which he was at first connected, and joining that to which he is now attached, may justify him on that point, by saying that, by education and family, he naturally belonged to the old Whig party of this country; but that, when he came to discuss public affairs, his principles and opinions led him naturally into the ranks of those with whom he is now associated.—(Long-continued cheering.) Now, Sir, a few words with regard to the effect of the motion before this House ; because, although the Right Hon. Ba ronet seemed to say that was not a fair argument to be used in the discussion, it was an argument which had ' ever been used in the House of Commons in regard to motions of this kind ; and with regard to a motion of this very kind, I will mention some of the general principles that were laid down by an authority—not perhaps re spected enough by me, but greatly so by gentlemen opposite—l mean Mr. Pitt. He said that he did not dis pute the right of the House to address the King for the removal of Ministers ; yet nothing could be more mischievous than Parliamentary interference by declared censure, ren dering the continuance in office impossible, unless that inter ference was justified by the extraordinary exigencies of the case. They ought also to look to the consideration of public expediency—of public safety. There are opinions which I con ceive to be sound with respect to a motion, which is in fact a motion for the removal of Ministers. The necessity for it must be shown by some strong grounds in the state of public affairs. —( Cheers.) Now, Sir, without entering into the various questions of policy that have not boon entered into in the debate, I do ask what arc the extraordinary circumstances which, in former times, have made such motion necessary ? Are we engaged in the midst of a calamitous war? Have we lost any of our fleets or armies ? Have we been de prived of any of her Majesty's dominions? Is civil war raging in the country ? Is the United Kingdom distracted by civil disturbance ? Why, Sir, Ido say, in all these circum stances there is nothing very extraordinary. If taking no credit for tranquillity or peace with foreign Powers, I am yet entitled to say, there is nothing of calamity on the face of public affairs—(Cheers)---and that it ould be a most extraordinary and an unusual step for the House of Commons to interfere, without the pros pect of some immediate good, some great public advantage which is to follow from the dismissal of Ministers ? Ono of these questions is whether there is an immediate means of forming another and a stronger administration. Is there the means of forming an administration which will have a stronger majority in this House ? If you will have recourse to a general election, are you certain that you would come out of that ordeal with any certainty of obtaining such a majority as will enable you to carry on art adminis tration? I believe you can give no answer to these ques tions.—( Hear, hear, hear.) My belief is that if by a vote of this House the present Ministry is removed, the one succeeding it will not live the three years succeeding their en trance into office. Ido say therefore, that as there is no certain prospect of such a majority—as there is no calamity hanging over the country—the speculation as to the likelihood of a cer tain course of policy preventing the insurrection which took place in Canada, was a most unusual ground for the re moval of the Administration.—( Hear, hear.) With these opinions, therefore,and feeling the affairs of Canada had been dealt with by Government in the manner best calculated to preserve them to the Crown, I will leave the question in the hands of the House. The Hon. Bart., after several weeks pre paration, and after a call of the House, has moved a vote of per sonal censure against one of the Secretaries of State. If he perse vere in that motion I shall feel myself hound to take advan tage of every circumstance which will enable me to give a direct negative to the motion. Without considering for a moment the amendment, I shall feel it my duty to my Colleague to take the sense of the House ; but at the same time, as the Hon. Baronet must feel that he has received no support from this House, I hope that he will withdraw the motion—and for my , part I shall feel perfectly satisfied if lie does so. Hon. Gentlemen opposite cannot say that we have not met their amendment. We thought it right to meet it directly.— ( Cheers. ) I feel therefore in duty bound not to put aside b y an y motion in this House the motion of the Honour able Baronet either. But I also think it my duty to make this request to the Honourable Baronet that he will not prevent us from coming to the direct division, and from making the question a direct one between the two great par ties in this H o use.—(Cheers and cries of " No, no," followed by loud cries for Sir W. Molesworth. - ) Sir W. MOLE SW ORTH said—Sir, at the same time that I assent to the proposition of the Noble Lord in m y motion, inasmuch a s th e amen d ment will first withdrawing go to a division, I have, however, to say that I cannot vote a .ainst t h e amendment, because it justly censures t h e con- Act of her Majesty's Government in their policy towards Canada ; and I cannot vote for it, because in its preamble it is unfair, u njust, and partial, and casts a censure upon the Goverament for their general conduct, and for mea sures in which I have supported them, and of which I ap prove.—( Vehement cheering , and cries of " Divide, divid e .") St rangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when the numbers were_... For Lord Sandon's motion . 287 Against it 316 MAJORITY FOR MINISTERS... 29 The excitement in th," House on the numbers being announced exceeded anything we ever rememicr to have witnessed. Se. vcral Members were observed standing on the floor of the House waving their hats, &e. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at three o'clock. LONDON and WESTMINSTER. BANK. The fourth Annual Meeting of the Directors and Proprietors of the London and 'Westminster Bank took place yesterday at the Old London Tavern, Bishopsgate-street. There was a full attendance of share holders and others interested in the affairs of the Company. The chair was taken at one o'clock by Mr. Glans, who stated that he regretted very much the absence of Mr. Stewart, who had usually presided at their annual meetings, and who had been detained by unavoidable business in Scotland. He regretted this the more because Mr. Stewart had been in the habit of addressing them at great length on the nature and advantage of Joint Stock Banks.—(Hear.) He (Mr. Gibbs) would not attempt to address them upon the subject further than to observe that the concern in which they were all inte rested, was in a sound and healthy state, and was likely to become a large and prosperous establishment. He would now call upon the Se cretary to read the Report of the Directors, and the statement of the accounts of the Company. The Secretary then read the Report as follows REPORT. On this the Fourth Anniversary of the Lond,:n and Westminster Bank, the Directors have again satisfaction in meeting the proprietors for the purpose of submitting to them a Report of the proceedings of the year ended 31st December, 1837. It is well known that the commercial difficulties which were adverted to in the previous reports, pros ailed for a considerable portion of the last year. That state of affairs rendered it expedient that a larger than ordinary amount of the Company's funds should be held unproductive, and when at a later period of the year confidence was somewhat restored and the mere.ntiie and monetary interest wore n. more prosperous aspect, the abundance of capital caused a depreciation of its value. These cir cumstances were not calculated to have a favourable influence upon the profits of any banking establishment ; nevertheless the Directors of this Bank are happy to have it in their power to declare a dividend of 51. per cent, upon the paid tip capital of 597,2801. and to make an addi tion to the rest which existed at the close of 1836. The dividend will be payable on Monday next, the 12th lest. The result of the operations of the year 1837, is shewn by the statement which is annexed to this report. It exhibits the net arn , )unt of the profits, after sufficient provisions for all bad and doubtful debts, to be 34,9041. los. Bd., leaving a surplus of 5,0404 10s. Si., after payment of the dividend of five per cent. There remained on former years a net surplus of 4,5271. Os. 6d., and these sums are exclusive of the surplus, 20,0031. 19s. 5d., from Pre mium on Shares, which were issue.l in the year 1836. In the last reports it was intimated that uegociations were in progress for the purchase of premises adjoining the freehold estate which had been bought from Messrs. Pearce, and thus additional property (freehold likewise) having been acquired at the price of 9,5001., the Directors did not delay the adoption of mea,ures for the erection of a building suitable to the importance and permanency of the Bank. They determined ca a plan which it is hoped will give general sits. faction. Although the ground, which is now the property of the Bank, is more extensive than was immediately required, the Directors felt it would be highly inexpedient to lose an opportunity of obtaining it, and of giving a characteristic elevation to the new building, while it afforded likewise the means of a beneficial return for the money invested. The contract price is 15,654/. This outlay will be subject to a deduction of about 2,5001„ the produce of old materials sold, and of a payment to be made by the city of London, for the cession of part of the property of the Bahk, towards widening the street. The building is to provide a commodious banking house with residence for a part of the establish ment, and an adjoining separate house, which is to be so constructed that it may be hereafter, if required, available as part of the Bank, and in the meantime, they have let off theseadjoining premises, under the advice of the surveyor on advantageous terms. In last year's Report it was stated that the debt due from the Northern and Central Bank to the London and Westminster Bank was to be dis charged in the month of July. The mercantile derangements of the year having, however, prevented that Company from liquidating its debts to the Bank of England until within a very recent period, delay in the adjustment of the debts due to the London and Westminster Bank became unavoidable ; and having perfect relhaice upon the solidity of the establishment, the Directors did not think themselves called upon to insist upon the punctual fulfilment of its engagements to this Bank; but its obligations are now in a state of gradual reduction, and there is no reason to doubt their entire liquidation in the course of a short time. There was in the last Report another topic upon which some further information will be expected, viz., the suit which was then depending between the Bank of England and the London and Westminster Bank, as to the power of the latter to accept bills at less than six months' date. In the beginning of the year 1837, the Master of the Rolls pronounced a judgment favourable to the view taken by the Bank of England; and the Directors determined, rather than appeal to the House of Lords, to sug gest to their country correspondents the adoption of the plan of drawing " without acceptance," as practised by the Bank of Ireland in drawing upon the Bank of England. The suggestion was adopted with readi ness—no practical inconvenience has been experienced in the working of the system—and none of the connections of the Bank have been lost in consequence of the decision of the Master of the Rolls. The Directors have to state, that by virtue of the clause of the deed of settlement, they have elected John Kirkland, Esq., to a seat in the Direction, and his election is now submitted for your approval. They have also to call your attention to three vacancies occasioned in the Direction (as stipulated in the deed), by the retirement of Messrs. Raiford, Salmons, and Bosanquet. These gentlemen being eligible for reelection, offer themselves accordingly. In conclusion, the Directors beg to state their conviction that the just expectations of the Proprietors as to the success of the Company will not be disappointed ; but while there can be no doubt of the gradual enlargement of its connection, they desire to impress earnestly upon each Proprietor, that it may be in his power individually to promote its interests, by a zealous co-operation with the Executive—by the adoption of the Bank, so far as shall be practicable, as the depositary and manager of his own funds—and by his recommendation of it to the attention of other persons. From such exertions will follow his own direct profit as a Proprietor, and the advancement of an establishment basest upon prin ciples which afford security and convenience to the community. PROFIT AND LOSS. Dr. Payment of the Dividend now declared, of 51. per cent. upon the paid-up Capital of 597,2551. for one year £29,864 0 0 Balance of unappropriated profits 9,567 11 2 £39,431 11 2 Balance of unappropriated Profits, De cember 31, 1836 £7,027 0 6 By vote to the Directors at last Gene ral ➢leeting £4,527 0 6 Profits of the year 1837, after paying all the current expenses, and after making sufficient provision for all bad and doubtful debts £39,431 11 2 Balance brought down Fund arising from Premium on Shares Sir C. BURRELL, M.P., moved the adoption of the Report, and he did so with the greatest satisfaction and pleasure. He bore testimony to the zeal and efficiency of the Directors, who had to contend against the great monied influence of the Bank of England, and against private Banking interests, by whom he regretted to say they had not been well used. He hoped some means would be taken to conciliate those par ties, and that a more liberal and conciliatory policy would be observed. The past year had been one of great monetary difficulty, and it was most satisfactory to find that, notwithstanding that circumstance, and that there was subsequently a great glut of capital without any outlet, the affairs of the Westminster Bank were in so prosperous a state, and that the profit was so large.—(Hear.) Nothing could more clearly show the excellent and judicious management of the Directors, and he thought them entitled to thebest thanks of the shareholders.—(Hear ) Mr. BROWN seconded the motion. It was by individual interest alone that persons could be made aware of their own interests. If all the members of the Company were to use their influence among their friends, no doubt the opposition referred to by the Honourable proprietor would be conned over and removed. He was exceedingly happy to rind that the means of the Establishment enabled the Directors to pursue a liberal course towards the Northern and Central Bank.— (Cheers.) That Establishment had received great accommodation from the London and Westminster Bank. The course that the Di rectors had adopted reflected great credit upon them.—(Cheers.) He cordially seconded the motion. A PROPRIETOR wished to know what was the sum due from the Northern and Central Bank P He wished also to know whether the profit that had been stated by the Report was exclusive of the expenses incurred by the proceedings of the Bank of England ? The CRAIRMAN said that the debt due by the Northern and Central Bank was about 76,0001., at the same time there was a property which had been realized, but was not in actual possession, which would probably reduce the debt below 70,000/. They had received money from them, and continued to do so. With respect to the other question, the law expenses had been paid, with the preliminary ex penses, out of the premiums paid upon shares. A PROPRIETOR thought the question had hardly been answered. There had been other law expenses incutred since last year in the suit with the Bank of England, and he understood the Proprietor to ask whether all the expenses had been paid. The Crt IRMAN—There is nothing owing—all has been paid up. Mr. PERRY inquired if the interest due from the Northern and Cen tral Bank had been regularly paid up to the present time. The CHAIRMAN—II has been paid to the 31st December. Mr. WHEELER had little to say after what had been stated by Sir C. Burrell, relative to the progressive improvement of the concern ; but he wished to recommend them all to put their shoulders to the wheel, be cause they could not expect the public would do for them what they did not feel inclined to do for themselves.—(Loud cheers.) He saw by the list there were about 782 proprietors, 383 of whom resided in the cosintry. Now they could not expect those who lived in the country to bank much with them ; but he found, on looking over their names, there were many influential gentlemen among them. Many of them were Members of the Society of Friends, and he trusted that notwithstanding the concern was doing well, they would not for. get their exertion was requisite. He knew there was a division of opinion among the Bankers, but he thought that by meeting these opinions with good humour and good feeling, he had no doubt they would be ultimately let into the clearing.—(Hear, hear.) There were 387 Proprietors residing in London, and how many of those did the meeting suppose banked with the establisment ?—(" All.") All ought to do—(Hear, hear, and a laugh)—but there were only 160. Now, were they true to themselves ? He would advise them to put their shoulders to the wheel, and when they got into the large House they would with a large capital be let into the clearing, and instead of getting six per cent., they would get fight per cent. Too much praise could not be given to the Directors for their conduct with regard to the Northern and Central Bank. A PROPRIRTOR begged to ask, were all Joint Stock Banks excluded from the Clearing-house, or was the exclusion directed individually against the Westminster Bank 7 The CHAIRMAN—The answer we received was, that it was established for the benefit of private banking-houses only. Another PROPRIETOR wished to know, was there any intention to en ter into the Scotch system of allowing cash credit accounts. The sub ject was, perhaps, a delicate one; but, from his knowledge of the system, if it could be done with safety, it would occasions a large accession of business, and be, at the same time, advantageous to the public. The CHAIRMAN.—The Directors had not adopted it, although it came before them for discusssion. '1 hey did not think it advisable, or suitable to London business, to introduce such a system, as it would induce the locking up of a large amount of capital. A PROPRIETOR begged to ask what was the amount of deposits at the different offices, on the 31st December, 1837 ? The question, he ad mitted, had been objected to at the last annual meeting. Several Gentlemen said the question ought not to be answered. The PROPRIETOR said the return had been made in 1834, and lie could not see why they now objected to it. The Batik of England al. ways published it. A Paornieroa observed that they were compelled to do so by Act of Parliament, and no comparison could be instituted between the two. It would, in his opinion, be most injurious to the concern to publish such statements.—(gear, hear.) The CHAIRMAN said the feeling of the Meeting appeared to be against the question. The question was then withdrawn. CHAIRMAN then put the question, that the report be received and adopted, which was carried unanimously. Sir G. CAREW hal a resolution to propose which he was satisfied would meet with the concurrence of the meeting generally. It was his intention to move a vote of thanks to the Directors, coupled with a sum for their pest services. He would move a vote of thanks to the Directors, and that a sum of 2,5001. should be awarded to them for their services during the past year.—(Cheers.) Captain I3ANDERSON seconded the motion, which the Chairman de clared to be carried unanimously. The CHAIRMAN, on behalf of himself and the Directors, returned thanks. lie could assure the proprietors that the desire of himself and the Directors was to improve the establishment. He trusted that the Report would be itnproved every ye ir. Mr. IlaowN wished to know whether there had been an increav in the number of accounts since the last year. He wished to know also whether the intention that had been expressed at the last meeting, of fOrming branch Banks in the country, had been carried into effect ; and whether those establishments had been attended with profit commen surate with the expenses of those estabrslnnents ? Mr. WHEELER thought that the question put by the Honourable Proprietor ought not to be asked, as the effect of answering it would be to tell the world to set up branch Banks in opposition to them. 'Pisa CHAIRMAN would have lio hesitation in answering the question, had it not been for the observation of the Honourable Proprietor. The Company had not established any new branches since the last meeting, and no branches had been established, or would be, in the country.—(Cheers.) Mr. SAVAGE thought the meeting ought not to separate without pass ing a vote of thanks to the different agents of the Company, He could bear his unqualified testimony to the perseverance and assiduity of Mr. Vine anti Mr. Ewing. Mr. PERRY said, that as at the last meeting it had been stated that a profit had arisen from the branch Banks, perhaps it would not be obi:eted to that the Chairman should state whether they had been a source of profit during the present year.—(hear, hear, and cries of " No, no.") If the feeling of the meeting was against him, he would not pre, his motion. On the motion of WMEELER, Messrs. Bosr.nquet, Raiford, and Salomons, the Directors, who went out by rotation, were re-elected. On the motion of Mr. OXENHANI, seconded by Mr. Perry, a vote of thanks was unsnimettsly carried to the Managers of the different metro politan branches for their assiduity and perseverance. Mr. GILBART returned thanks on the part of his colleagues aura himself. Mr. BROWN begged to ask whether the Act for the regulation of Banking Companies which had lately been passed would in any way af tech the London and Westminster Bank, with regard to the discounting of country Bills ? The CHAIRMAN replied in the negative. On the motion of Sir CHARLES BURRELL, seconded by Mr. Oxagliem, a vote of thanks was passed to the Chairman. The CHAIRMAN briefly returned thanks, and the meeting separated. The trial of Myers, against whom a Bill of in dictment has been preferred for setting fire to his house in High-street, iNlarylebone, has been postponed to the next ses sion of the Criminal Court. A Cricket Match was played on the 17th ult. on Bailenwaite Lake. ESTABLISHED CHURCH OF SCOT• LAND. MEETING AT THE CITY OF LONDON TAVERN. A meeting of the 'Friends of Civil and Religious Liberty" was 3 ester. day held at the City of London Tavern, to consider the propriety of petitioning Parliament against any further grants to the Established Church of Scotland. It was advertised that the Chair should be taken at twelve o'clock, but by eleven three or four of the front benches were taken possession of, principally by ladies. At the time appointed for taking the Chair, the room was nearly filled, and there were then upwards of a thousand persons present. The Chair was taken by Mr. Charles Lushington, M.P., at a quarter past twelve. There were then on the platform Mr. Gillon, M.P., Mr. Baines, M. P., Mr. A. Fletcher, Mr. Burdite, Mr. Clayton, Mr. Burnet, Rev. Mr. Wardlaw, Rev. I'. Binney, Rev. Thomas Steyne, Rev. Mr. Bennett, Drs. Morrison, Fletcher, and Cox, Rev. Mr. Harry, and a number of other Dissenting Clergymen. On the motion of H. Weymouth, Esq., Charles Lushington, Esq., M.P., was unanimously called to the Chair. The CIIAIRMAN said that when called upon to come forward upon any public occasion in defence of the rights, civil and religious, of the Dissenters, he could not hesitate to comply with the request—(Hear, hear, and cheers)—and it was with pleasure that he took the chair of this meeting which was held on behalf of the seceders from the Church of Scotland.—(Cheers.) Little solicitation, indeed, was necessary to induce him to do so, for he had passed the greater portion of his life in intimacy with Scotchmen, and the most valued friend he ever possessed belonged to that nation.—(('heers.) Added to these personal considerations, however, he was influenced by a con viction that the cause of justice would be promoted by a successful opposition to this arbitrary, impolitic, insidious and insulting measure which they were this day called upon to oppose.— (Hear, hear, and cheers ) Not merely Scotch, but English Dissenters were interested in this matter, because the principle, if once admitted in regard to Scotland, would soon be applied to England, and the al. ready enormous emoluments of the Established Church might be in. definitely augmented by such a measure.—(Loudcheers.) Englishmen therefore were selfishly interested in this question, and on that ac count, perhaps, could not claim much merit for coming forward ou this occasion. Of late years certain individuals had erected a large number of Churches amounting to about 170 in Scotland by private subscrip tions; but with a feeling which he would not attempt to describe, and which appeared to be a very questionable kind of emulation, they had placed these Churches on the very spots occupied by Dissenters. Finding that the strength of the voluntary principle was not sufficient for the voluntary endowment of these Churches, they had determined to apply to Parliament for an endowment out of what was called the Bi. shop's tiends, and which were already merged in the general resources of the country; 'therefore if access were given to that fund, every Dis senter in Scotland and England would be affected.—(Cheering.) If these endowments were admitted at all they should be taken from what was called the Heritors' (lends, which were appropriated by the parochial authorities to provide for churches and for the ministra tion in thews.—(Hear, hear, hear.) A deputation of the most. enlightened and most respectable of tile Scotch Dissenters had been sent over, not like one of their distinguished Presbyterian adversaries (we I resume the Hon. Chairman meant Dr. Chalmers) who had taken a journey for the purpose of preaching up episcopal establishments— (Loud cheers)—but to explain this subject, and to uphold the cause of civil and religious liberty by destroying every pretence for the pro_ pcsed grant. In consequence of the misrepresentations of the Church party in Scotland a commission was appointed under the royal sign manual in 1835, for the purpose of inquiring into the state of religious instruction in Scotland, and they were desired to commence their inquiries iu Edina burgh and Glasgow. Now, from certain Reports which had been made of the religious circumstances of the country about Edinburgh and Glasgow, it appeared, first, that in both those cities the Dissenters greatly out-numbered the adherents of the Church. The popu. lation of Edinburgh and Leith was 162,292, of which there be longed to the Established Church, 76,330; to other denomina tions, 76,570.—(A Gentleman on the platform, 86,000.) In Glasgow, the population was 213,810 ; of which the Established Church num. bored 99,199, and other denominations 100,529. Then, again, in Edinburgh, the occupied seats were 9.614 belonging to the Established Church, and to the Dissenters 11,360. In Glasgow the scats of the Church were 6,599, and the Dissenters 13,047. In Edinburgh and Glasgow there were 40,000 seats unlet.—(Cheers.) Such being the case, he would ask what became of the complaint of the deficiency of accommodation, when 40,000 were unoccupied? He would state one more fact with respect to the Clergy of Scotland, and Edinburgh and Glasgow. The Clergy of the Church of England were exceeded by the Dissenters. In those places there were 62 Clergymen of the Established Church, and 88 of other denominations. Without intending the slightest disrespect to the clergy of the Church of Scotland, who, he believed, were a most meritorious and religious class of persons, and who deserved the esteem of all persons in a high degree when they did not mix themselves up with politics—(Cheers)--without intending in the slightest degree to say anything disrespectful of them, he would, with the permission of the meeting, read one or two instances of extra ordinary self devotion which had taken place among some of the cler gymen of Glasgow. It appeared from evidence that none of the office bearers, including the Glassites, received any pecuniary remuneration. The ltcv. Mr. Duncan preached the Gospel without any charge; ano ther minister officiated to 1,000 persons gratuitously ; and Dr. Beattie, who received a stipend secured by what he considered the highest security in existence, a security which existed before Bonds and Acts of Parliament were thought of—the statutary law of the heads of the Church—(Cheer.)—that worthy Divine stated that his knowledge of his congregation was so minute, that of 1,569 communicants, he could state that he knew every one of them personally. Ile stated also that he could name the whole of their children.—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Lushington) wished that some couple of Pluralists were here, in order that this noble example might be pointed out to them.—(Great cheering.) These were noble instances of devotion, and how were these admirable proofs of disinterestedness and noble acts of philan thropy and love towards men recompensed and requited ? Why, by contempt, mortification, and state counteraction—by particular favour ti a favoured sect.—(Cheers.) What was the plea for this ? Why, for better accommodation for the lower classes of the people of Scot. land. Now what was the opinion of the people of Scotland, espe cially about Glasgow ?—(Hear and cheers.) He would stete it, One Clergyman stated that the poor were Churchmen from convenience, but Dissenters from principle, and that generally speaking they would be Dissenters but for convenience. —(Hear.) That testimony was cols. firmed by several other witnesses who were brought before the Com mission. He would call upon the Dissenters of England and Scotland to let these truths be remembered and circulated—let them be stated to the Ministry and announced to the Houseof Commons—let every Mem ber of Parliament be imbued with the facts he hod stated, and many others which would be detailed to them by other gentlemen, and let them declare that any new endowment would be passed in defiance of justice, reason, and prudence, and in mockery of every principle of enlightened Government —(Cheers.) Mr. Laing, in his History of Scotland states that in 1826, when an attempt WAS made to extort the surrender of tithes from the proprietors, a very strong resistance was excited; and among demonstrations of opposition was that of an old and _blind Lord—Lord Belhaven. He was brought to the Assembly, and was placed next to the Earl of Dumfries, whom he held with one hand, while in the other he grasped a concealed dagger, to plunge into Isis heart on the first commotion. Let them imitate that old Lord's energy, but not Isis crime—let them not carry daggers in their bosoms, but let them bear firm and determined hearts, chastened by righteous modera tion, although guided by inflexible duty, and which could not fail, if so regulated, to ensure success to their undertaking.—(Choers.) Mr. H. Weemouen, who was received with loud cheers, said that. he had been requested by the United Committee--sympathising with their friends in Scotland, and recollecting the sympathy which those friends expressed with them on the question of Church-rates, and that the question of additional churches in Scotland stood upon the same grounds —to introduce to the meeting the deputation from Scotland.—(Ap. elause.) The united Committees were induced to call this meeting by the consideration that church rates and the additional grant stood on the same ground. Both recognised the principle of compulsion, and yet there was this difference—that the church rate, however grievous, was one to which the people of England were accustomed; but the additional grant to the Church of Scotland was new and uncalled for. If that grant were conceded, the next thing would be a compulsory grant for additional Churches in England.—( Hear, hear.) Some persons connee. ted with the Establishment in England thought that more Churches were wanted, and they applied to the public for funds. Now, cousi. Bering that they had newly tried their hauls at the voluntary system, they hed succeeded pretty well.—(A laugh.) They had raised, he believed, upwards of 120,0001. ; but if the example were set them of a compulsory grant to the Church of Scotland they would abandon the voluntary system and go to Parliament. In the yi•ar 1834 the Church of Scotland allowed the people the right of veto upon the appointments of the patron. That had lately been disputed and carried into the Court of Session, where eight Judges out of thirteen had given an opinion that the veto was illegal. He would not detain the meeting longer, but would conclude by introducing the deputation from Scotland. He then led forward the Rev. Drs. Wardlaw, Heugh, and Beattie, and the Rev, Messrs. French, Harper, and King. The Rev. Dr. Weaneew then rose to address the. meeting, and was received with loud applause. lie said that he cheerfully complied, as far as a sense of duty was concerned, but most eluctantly, inasmuch as he felt his inability to do it justice, wills the request of the united Committee to lay a statement e f their case before that numerous and highly-respectable meeting, This duty had been in some measure rendered unnecessary by what had :dready taken place. The dsput-tion appeared before the meeting as else representatives of three great b dies of the Scotch Dissenters, namely, the United Secession Churches, the Relief Churches, and the, Congregational Churches of Scotland ; and some of them also as the representatives of the Central Board of Scotland for defending the rights of the Dissenters. it was necessary in the first place to mention that they bad been preceded by memorials to the Government, but the Dissenters of Scotland slid not think that sufficient. They were imx'ous to impress her Majesty's Ministers and the people of England with the fact, that they were in dead earnest about the matter.— (Hear, hear, and laughter.) %Nit!) that view they had sent delegates to London, to endeavour to influence her Majesty's Ministers to resist this claims of the Scotch Church for additional endowments. It would be well, before he proceeded further, to state the present and prospective extent of those claims. It was well known that there had existed in the Church of Scotland fur a length of time a number of Churches, supported by the voluntary principle, and which were denominated (shape s i f Ease. By au Act, however, of the General Assembly, all these clan cites (about sixty in number) had been erected into parochial enmities, and for the support of these the additional endowments were demanded. But this was not all : the Established Church had raised 170 new churches by subscription, and for these also endowments were claimed. They canoe to resist not a large demand but a little demand—whatever it might be, they resisted a principle— (Loud cheering.) It was not a matter of plus or minus, but a matter of pi ineiple, and they had heard that if once the wedge was introduced, the sledge hammer of ecclesiastical zeal, wielded by the arm of the most powerful workinen, would come in rapid sue ce sion--they could not tell how deeply it might penetrate, or what might be split asunder.—(Hear, hear.) They resisted therefore, all endowments to the Church of Seotlaed—they resisted them as un scriptural, as unjust, as unnecessary, and as uncharitael e—( Hear, hear.) The sentiment he was now about to utter might possibly not meet with the concurrence of every mind present—that he could not help—but ho and his fellow Dissenters from Scotland held that in the Scriptures —the statutory law of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ—they had bolh in the form of precept, and the form of precedent, the still of the great Head of the Church in regard to the manner in which that Church was to be maintained and its interests promoted.— (Hear, hear.) They held therefore that es that was the book that contained the Law of Chtist on this subject, all Legislation beyond what was contained in that Book wa' an infraction of that law, end the rubst travel of human measures in es to (Cheors ) Ite meet desired to have tits s'ightest &ere no Ins tooled with regard to the pre sent and ultimate operation of every firmly sawt•one..l principle. Th considered that the, were expressed precepts on the subject as welt as matter o: fact. `I If We have ministers to give spiritual things, is it a great thing that we should reap carnal things." In principle they were bound to resist every eiscroachment or infraction of what they conceived to be the law of Christ. They conceived that as to the chapels of ease is Scotlaud making application for endows: elite was peculiarly preposterous. 1. , al hithertoourbeess:tilopupe: y , r supported eby tr v u e e . hin. thatary principle; aiid if the uag o it is bless.od to r. ing he tStatteo:l t r i e ip t: eg(n truth, b i l i e v i t e t c , al.,rits',:,3lll;o,tha'ie'rni,es'is and sie:ll:ei—and cheering.) of :tuto se e spoke w ls ith o!. pe a rfeet seriousness when he said that every Christian man ought to feel it to be his duty to support the ordinances of Christ; therefore an eedewmint to those chapels would be perfectly presses ' terous. They were ca conies indeed to ail additional endowments, and their principle was founded upon an entire disapprobation of all State endowments. They had no hesitation in avowing this. They held the Lys of Christ to be laid down in the New Testament, and who had a right to change it ? if he found eller a lapse of three centuries mottle?